National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 1 Postdoctoral Scholars in US Institutions
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 2000. Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9831.
×
Page 41

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

2 Features of the Postdoctoral Population S cientists, mathematicians, and engineers seek postdoctoral experience(s) for different reasons. They may be motivated by the desire to deepen their understanding of a field, to learn a new subfield, to switch fields entirely, or to gain experience in an industrial or government facility. Most postdocs share a desire to enter a career that emphasizes long-term research. Some learn that it is possible to combine research expertise with other skills and find rewarding em- ployment in teaching, consulting, business, law, policy making, and other activ- ities. The postdoctoral years are a time to match one’s educational background, training, and interests with the changing world of employment and to acquire the skills necessary to enter that world. The decision (usually made during graduate school) about whether to under- take a postdoctoral appointment is seldom easy and should involve consultation with one’s adviser and as many mentors or other experienced contacts as possi- ble. Issues to examine include how much one enjoys doing research, one’s level of research skills, and the kind of career that seems most attractive. A post- doctoral experience may raise one’s employability, as well as be virtually oblig- atory in certain fields (notably the biological sciences), but a zest for research should be the first criterion in choosing a postdoc opportunity. Postdoctoral experiences can differ greatly depending on the disciplines in which they are undertaken, their sources of funding, and the institutional settings in which they occur. The following sections describe those differences in more detail. 21

22 ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS POSTDOCS IN DIFFERENT DISCIPLINES Figure 2-1 shows the difference among disciplines in terms of the percent- age of doctorates that seek postdoctoral appointments. The percentage is largest in the biological sciences, with physics, chemistry, and the earth sciences not far behind. Differences among disciplines in the median number of years spent in a postdoctoral appointment are discussed in Chapter 1.1 The early career status of postdocs is illustrated in Figure 2-2, which also shows how employment status varies by field. Figure 2-3 indicates the median postdoctoral salaries. The lowest compensation is provided to academic postdocs in chemistry,2 the highest to engineering postdocs who work in industry. Table 2-1 compares the number of graduate students in a field with the employment of all doctorates in a field— providing an indication of the likely job market. The need for postdoctoral study also differs among disciplines. Postdoctoral work is now prerequisite for most long-term employment in the life sciences, especially for those planning academic, industrial, or other research careers, as well as teaching careers at many small colleges. In some areas, competition for positions is equally intense at universities and in the private sector, and many life-science PhDs find postdoctoral appointments in biotechnology and pharma- ceutical companies. In the physical sciences (chemistry and physics), most PhDs who plan research careers are advised to do postdoctoral work. Postdoctoral positions are available at industrial and national facilities, where research facili- ties are often unique or comparable to those at universities. In mathematics, postdoctoral positions are few in number, competitive, and primarily found at universities. Postdocs in mathematics are usually hired as temporary faculty, carry a full teaching load (NSF postdocs teach less), and often have neither a structured research program nor an adviser. Postdocs are less common among both engineers and social scientists. As mentioned above, engineers usually enter full-time employment after a master’s or bachelor’s degree. The number of postdocs in some areas of behavioral and social science (e.g., psychology) has risen recently, primarily in health-related areas. According to a 1998 survey of four fields by the AAU,3 the proportion of PhDs accepting or seeking postdoctoral appointments increased from 25 percent in 1975 to over 42 percent in 1995. In biochemistry and physics more than 80 1As shown in Figure 1-5, biological scientists spend the most years as postdocs, with physicists not far behind. 2The low compensation of chemists is due in part to their relatively junior status compared to longer-term postdocs in the biological sciences. 3The AAU’s Committee on Postdoctoral Education based its 1998 Report and Recommendations on “informal” surveys of “selected major research universities” in four disciplines: biochemistry, mathematics, physics, and psychology. The purpose of the surveys was “to gain insight into campus policies and practices governing postdoctoral education and to sample the views of postdocs.”

70 60 50 40 Percent 30 20 10 0 Agriculture Biological Medical Engineering Mathematical Earth, Physics and Chemistry Social Psychology Sciences Sciences and Atmospheric, Astronomy Sciences Computer and Ocean S i FIGURE 2-1: Percentage of New Doctorates Planning Postdoctoral Appointments, by Degree Field in 1998. Source: Doctorate Records File, 23 1998.

24 ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS 60 Postdoctoral Appointment Non-Faculty Researchers* Industry or Self-Employed 50 Tenure Track at 4-yr College or University Non-Profit Organization or Government 40 Unemployed Percent 30 20 10 0 All S&E Biological Chemistry Engineering Physics and Psychology Fields Sciences Astronomy FIGURE 2-2: 1997 Status of 1995 Postdoctorates, by Selected Science and Engineering Field. Source: Merged 1995 and 1997 Survey of Doctorate Recipients. Note: Non-faculty researchers are full-time academic personnel who do not have faculty rank and indicated their primary work activity is pure or applied research. Academe Industry Government 60,000 50,000 40,000 Dollars 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Life Sciences Engineering Physics and Chemistry Social/Behavioral Astronomy Sciences FIGURE 2-3: Median Postdoctoral Salaries by Employment Sector and Field of Doctor- ate in 1997 for Doctorate in the Six-Year Cohort, 1991-1996. Source: 1997 Survey of Doctorate Recipients.

TABLE 2-1: 1997 Employment Characteristics for All Doctorates and 1998 Graduate Enrollments at Doctoral Granting Institutions 1997 Employment1 Tenured & Other Non- All 1998 Total Academic Tenure Track Academic Academic Postdoctoral Full Time Employed Faculty* Faculty Personnel Employment Positions Enrollment2 Agricultural Sciences 21,264 8,201 7,470 1,448 11,042 573 8,529 Biological Sciences 101,767 41,625 34,640 8,680 39,134 12,328 45,054 Medical Sciences 16,581 7,850 6,390 954 7,276 501 41,019 Engineering 87,954 22,365 20,332 3,205 60,528 1,856 63,806 Mathematics and Computer Science 32,024 17,309 16,012 1,454 12,856 405 26,553 Earth and Atmospheric Sciences 15,766 5,354 4,594 1,578 8,111 723 9,952 Astronomy and Physics 35,803 10,073 8,766 3,130 20,551 2,049 10,326 Chemistry 53,398 12,238 11,016 2,648 36,398 2,114 15,281 Social Sciences 63,116 36,643 33,276 4,915 20,986 572 49,828 Psychology 75,347 21,219 17,790 5,347 46,740 2,041 29,032 * Individuals with faculty rank, tenured positions, or tenure track positions 1Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, 1997 2Source: Survey of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering 25

26 ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS percent of responding departments said they would not consider hiring a faculty member who lacked postdoctoral experience. A University of California at Ber- keley survey that tracked scientists who received PhDs in biochemistry in the 1980s found that 86 percent of them did a postdoc and 40 percent did two or more postdocs with different mentors.4 SOURCES OF FUNDING FOR POSTDOCS Postdocs are paid by a variety of funding sources, and their status as post- docs depends in significant ways on the nature of the source. This status is reflected in differences in pay and other benefits; some postdocs receive no health insurance, for example, while others may receive full health benefits, including dental insurance, sick leave, personal leave, disability, life insurance, and retirement plans. Within a wide range of variability by field (see Figure 2-4), most postdoc- toral researchers are supported on the grant of a PI and may be called postdoctor- al associates or research associates. A smaller number bring their own funding in the form of fellowships and traineeships, and are often called postdoctoral fellows. For example, of the almost 4,500 postdocs supported by the NSF, only about 200 are supported by fellowships.5 Traineeships also are provided through Center training grants, which are neither PI- nor postdoc-generated. This guide addresses all postdoctoral scientists and engineers, regardless of title or source of funding. The position of postdocs may differ considerably, according to their source of funding, even though their experiences are identical. Postdocs who work on the grant of a PI are essentially employed to work on the adviser’s project and may receive standard benefits from a lab or institution; in some fields, they may also have less flexibility in choosing their research topics and extramural experi- ences. A postdoc supported by a competitive individual fellowship or grant gen- erally has more prestige and initial flexibility in choosing a program and adviser particularly if the fellow is thereby without cost to the adviser’s grants. On the negative side, fellows may not qualify for important institutional benefits. For example, the University of California campuses offer postdocs who are paid from research grants and classified as research associates the same benefits, including vacation, as other employees. By contrast, postdocs who are classified 4Nerad, M. and Cerny, J. “Postdoctoral patterns, career advancement, and problems,” Science, 1999, Vol. 285: pp. 1533-5. 5Information provided by the NSF to COSEPUP when it held its focus group at NSF indicates that of the 4,478 postdoctoral scholars supported by NSF in 1999, most are in the mathematics and physical sciences (1,885), followed by the biological sciences (1,183), geosciences (452), engineering (339), computer science (265), education and human resources (187), and the social and behavioral sciences (80).

FEATURES OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION 27 Non-Federal Federal: Traineeships Federal: Research Grants Federal: Fellowships 100 80 60 Percent 40 20 0 e es s g s s y ry es y ce ce ce om log ur rin ist nc nc ult ien ien ien ee em ho on cie cie ric gin Sc Sc Sc yc str Ch lS lS Ag Ps En dA al ter an ica cia dic ce pu an og So Me dO om ol ics Bi dC an ys Ph ic, an er al ph tic os ma tm the ,A Ma rth Ea FIGURE 2-4: Source of Support for Academic Postdoctoral Appointees, by Field, 1998. Source: 1998 Survey of Graduate Student and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering. as fellows have no allowance for vacation. Health benefits vary similarly, as indicated by the wide variety of responses to the COSEPUP survey (see Box). Most individual fellowships are funded by federal agencies, notably the NIH and NSF. Other fellows are supported by foreign governments, private foundations, and private firms. Some fellows receive supplementary funding

28 ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS Does Your Organization Provide Medical Benefits to All Postdocs and Their Dependents? This question drew a wide distribution of responses. Among universities, only one-tenth reported paying for medical benefits for all postdocs and their depen- dents. An equal number provided full medical benefits to all postdocs but not their dependents. Over one-third of respondents reported that the source of the postdoc’s funding determines medical benefit availability. Nearly one-fourth reported that “the organi- zation informs postdocs of medical benefit plans that they and their dependents can enter at their own expense.” About one-sixth said that the organization requires postdoc advisers to pay for the medical benefits of their postdocs. Of nonacademic organizations, more than half reported paying for “medical benefits for all postdocs and their dependents.” COSEPUP Survey Results when their stipends are insufficient (although there are restrictions on using funds from one federal grant to pay another federal grantee). Different sources of funding cause some confusion regarding taxes. Institu- tions tend to regard postdocs who work on research grants as employees, with- holding tax money from their pay. Postdocs, however, are not usually regarded as employees for tax purposes; they must file quarterly estimated payments as self-employed individuals. The issue of tax status is a complex one that deserves clarification on the national level,6 especially with regard to postdocs who are not US citizens.7 6The legal status of postdocs has received limited attention at the federal level, being generally inferred from regulations governing the treatment of graduate students. There is discussion occurring as part of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) Presidential Review Directive “Renew- ing the Federal Government-University Research Partnership for the 21 st Century” being developed by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the NSTC. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21 stipulates that federal agencies can support graduate students as research assistants on federally funded research grants only to the extent that “a bona fide employer-employee relationship” exists between a student and a faculty investigator. There are suggestions that federal policy should be clarified to recognize the dual trainee/employee status of postdocs. For further perspective, see the AAU’s “Graduate Education Report: Final Draft,” June 12, 1998. 7According to numerous COSEPUP interviews with postdocs who are not US citizens or permanent residents, their contributions to the research enterprise are often reduced by their inability to obtain or maintain appropriate visa status. The most common options—the “J” student visa and the “H” professional visa—have substantial drawbacks when applied to postdocs. For example, foreign nationals on a J visa commonly depend on their advisers for visa extensions or conversions to a green card, creating the potential for abuse.

FEATURES OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION 29 Postdocs in universities may face uncertainties with regard to their funding if they do not know the termination date of the research grant that supports them. Postdocs in government and industrial settings are less often dependent on fund- ing with a fixed termination date and may have fewer financial worries. POSTDOCS IN DIFFERENT SECTORS Participants in the COSEPUP focus groups indicated a wide variation in their postdoc experiences according to sector. In industrial and national facili- ties, postdocs tend to receive higher salaries and clear institutional standing with the same benefit structure as other temporary or contract employees. In universi- ties, stipends are lower, benefits vary by source of funding, and institutional standing may be uncertain. Postdocs in universities. The vast majority of postdocs work in universities as research associates on PI grants.8 The exact number of grant-supported post- docs is unclear, however, because different institutions use different titles to describe them, and because major funding agencies (e.g., NSF and NIH) do not have a mechanism for counting or tracking the postdocs they support (though NIH is currently considering a tracking system). Postdocs in academia have more opportunity than other postdocs to teach and mentor others (especially graduate students). These activities are important in gaining subsequent university employment, and can be essential for landing a faculty position at a four-year college. Most postdocs, however, report little time (or encouragement from advisers) for activities away from research. Without these experiences their job options may be limited (especially for foreign post- docs, many of whom can benefit from stronger language skills). Other critical skills developed by many academic postdocs include writing grant proposals, critically reviewing manuscripts, and presenting research results at disciplinary society meetings. Although graduate students and postdocs often work closely together in universities, their roles and experiences differ. Graduate students usually have access to special student offices and resources, have many peers, and can rely on oversight from multiple faculty. According to COSEPUP’s survey and focus groups, postdocs often work under a single adviser with no other oversight or protection, may have little or no access to institutional facilities or benefits, and sometimes know few or no other postdocs at the institution. 8Exact proportions are not available. Federal agencies, which support most postdocs via research grants, award grant monies directly to institutions, which may assign various titles to those who are supported by those grants. Thus the same postdoc who is a “research associate” at one institution might be called a “fellow” at another. However, it is clear that the vast majority of postdocs are supported by research grants. As previously stated, of postdocs supported by NSF, some 95 percent are paid from research grants.

30 ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS The funding situation for postdocs at medical schools has several distinctive features. Many postdocs who plan careers in biomedical research work in medi- cal schools and most are paid from NIH research grants. Clinicians with medical degrees, however, may also do “postdoctoral” research for a year or more with- out intending a traditional research career. Clinicians who take time away from the hospital continue to be paid a house-staff salary, which is typically more than twice that of most postdocs. Postdocs in industry. Private firms value postdocs for their up-to-date training and technical skills. Industrial postdoc positions usually differ from academic ones in offering higher salaries, stricter time limits (three years is common), fewer teaching opportunities, and an environment geared toward cre- ating marketable and profitable products. Practical advantages may include standardized employee benefits, access to well-equipped labs and technology, exposure to industrial culture, teamwork, and management styles, all of which can differ greatly from university life. Depending on the company and research environment, drawbacks may include the chance of being transferred from one’s chosen project, limited ability to take ownership of a project, a focus on marketable results, and restrictions on infor- mation exchange for proprietary reasons. Restrictions on the use and publication of results may in some cases hinder a postdoc from moving back into academia. Many firms do not hire their own postdocs as staff scientists, or hire only those with specific technical skills. Postdocs in government facilities. Government postdoc positions, particu- larly those in large national labs, may offer opportunities not available in a university or industry setting. Some national facilities are unique in the scope of their research, the complexity of their equipment and research facilities, and the size of their research groups. A national facility may provide a more interdisciplinary setting than a uni- versity, as well as more interaction with other divisions and researchers. Some laboratory groups are run collaboratively by staff and postdocs, who jointly make decisions on hiring and other strategies. It is possible for a postdoc to be the only person working on a project, but a team setting is more common. Like private firms, national facilities afford few teaching or mentoring expe- riences and may allow a postdoc less flexibility than a university in determining the direction of research. At most national settings, applicants are expected to submit proposals that fit closely with the adviser’s ongoing work. Exceptions occur for postdocs who bring their own funding, such as National Research Council (NRC) research associates. Postdocs at national facilities are usually temporary employees, receiving salaries at the high end of the postdoctoral scale. Terms of two to three years are normal. National labs used to offer postdocs permanent research positions, but this may be less common in times of hiring restraints (some agencies, such as NASA, have imposed multi-year hiring freezes). Some postdocs at government

FEATURES OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION 31 facilities move to “soft-money” grants or contracts, others to jobs in academia or the private sector. Postdocs at some facilities, such as NIH, may be barred from applying for certain fellowships. Postdocs abroad. Because science is increasingly international, experience in a foreign country can strengthen one’s network of potential collaborators and bring valued exposure to different research settings. For the citizens of many countries, postdoctoral work abroad (usually in the US or Europe) is virtually mandatory for an academic career. A smaller number of Americans are willing to seek postdoctoral positions overseas, fearing that too much time “out of sight” can reduce their chances at the best positions at home. For this reason, some overseas postdocs schedule at least one meeting a year in the US. The NSF’s International Research Fellow Awards support work abroad, including time for relocating back to the US. The program director reports that few postdocs seek positions abroad, but that those who do have little difficulty finding desirable positions upon their return. SUB-POPULATIONS OF POSTDOCS Certain special issues regarding the postdoctoral experience arose repeated- ly during focus group and committee discussions: the impact of foreign post- doctoral scholars, challenges to women, and the need for information about minority postdocs. These issues are discussed in more depth below. Foreign postdocs. The postdoctoral setting is now an international one. For more than a decade, foreign postdocs (i.e., postdocs who are residents of other nations or residents in the US on permanent visas) have played a substantial role in the US postdoctoral experience. At present, slightly more than half of all postdocs in science and engineering are temporary residents (see Figure 2-5). Disciplinary societies and institutions estimate that this percentage holds true for virtually every field in science and engineering. According to NSF data, about half of foreign postdocs remain in the US after their term’s end. The proportion who stay on varies by region of origin; however, postdocs from southeast Asia are more likely to stay than are postdocs from western Europe or Japan, for example. Variations are at least partly attrib- utable to job prospects in their home countries. US institutions report several concerns over the experiences of foreign post- docs. Many postdocs arriving from abroad have serious difficulties adjusting to the language and customs of this country. Even though lack of language skills has been associated with poor career outcomes,9 some foreign postdocs—espe- cially those who work with others who speak the same language—do not master English, hampering their teaching and other professional abilities. In addition, 9“Poor career outcomes” referred to the inability to find a desired position, as reported by Roger Chalkey of Vanderbilt University at the COSEPUP workshop, Dec. 21, 1999.

90 32 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 Percent US Citizens or Permanent Residents 10 0 , g y y es es try ic es es m es ds nc nc is er es erin nc nc o log nc el e e m e e on ho e Fi ci ci he ph enc i ne ci ci r yc ci E lS S C os ci ng lS lS st s lS & a al tm S E a a A P ia S t ur ic , A an ic tic nd ll g ed a a oc A ul lo th ce m S ic io ar M e cs gr B E dO th si A a an M hy P FIGURE 2-5: Percentage, by Field, of US Citizens or Permanent Residents with Postdoctoral Appointments in US Institutions, 1988-1998. Source: Survey of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering.

FEATURES OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION 33 there is anecdotal evidence that foreign postdocs have received lower compensa- tion than postdocs who are US citizens of the same professional accomplish- ment.10 If mentoring problems arise the foreign postdoc is restricted by visa guidelines from changing advisers. About a third of the institutions responding to the COSEPUP survey did not have staff that dealt specifically with the needs of foreign postdocs. Of those institutions offering help, most found that foreign postdocs needed assistance in the areas of visas, taxes, Social Security, housing, and language skills (see section and COSEPUP Survey Box, “Special Needs of Foreign Nationals,” in Chapter 5 for more information). Women postdocs. The experience of women postdocs differs from that of men in several respects. In some fields, notably engineering and the physical and mathematical sciences, women are significantly under represented as would be expected by their low participation in these fields. Women are outnumbered by men in engineering by more than four to one (826 vs. 205), and in physical and mathematical sciences by a similar difference (3,044 vs. 680). Women postdocs lag behind males in the life sciences (5,920 men vs. 4,363 women) and outnum- ber men in the social/behavioral sciences (1,173 to 963). Figure 2-6 reflects this same trend when the data is broken down by degree field. Figure 2-7 shows that there is essentially no change in the proportional representation of women as doctorates or postdoctorates. See Appendix Table B-19 for more details. A second difference can be seen in salary levels (see Figure 2-8). Here women postdocs lag behind their male counterparts in every field. The differ- ence in engineering is most striking, with men receiving an average of $6,000 (20 percent) more, but even in the social/behavior sciences, where women post- docs outnumber men, the “gender bonus” in favor of males is $3,000. Women in the COSEPUP focus groups reported discrimination against those who take time away from the lab to start a family. Some funding organizations are working on this issue. Burroughs Wellcome now offers flexible timelines on grants for women in the biomedical sciences. (See box on Postdocs and Family Life.) Minority postdocs. Little information is available on members of under- represented US minority groups who are postdoctoral scholars. (Far more is known about foreign postdocs than minority postdocs.) The available data are provided in Table 2-2. As indicated, in 1997 there were 1,242 minority post- doctoral scholars, or 5.5 percent of the US postdoc population.11 Their salaries 10Agencies that compile statistics on postdoc compensation do not distinguish recipients by na- tional status. However, both US and non-US postdocs stated during interviews with COSEPUP that foreign postdocs have received lower compensation than US nationals, and that it has not been uncommon for foreign postdocs (especially women) to work without any compensation. 11Survey of Doctorate Recipients, 1997.

34 12,000 10,000 Males Females 8,000 6,000 Number 4,000 2,000 0 g s es y es y es es es ic nc m try &E nc nc nc rin at ie no is nc og ie ie ie ee m m ie hol ll S Sc Sc Sc in Sc tro he Sc A he As C l yc ral cal al Eng at an d a Ps tu gi ic M ce ci ul lo ed O an So ic io M d s r B ic Ag an ys r ic Ph e ph os tm ,A r th Ea FIGURE 2-6: Number of Male and Female Postdoctorates in 1997, by Degree Field, for the 1991 to 1996 Degree Cohort. Source: 1997 Survey of Doctorate Recipients.

80 70 Percentage of Female Doctorates 60 Percentage of Female Postdocs 50 40 Percent 30 20 10 0 es g s s y ry s s es es in ic ce m ce gy ld nc nc nc er at en no ist en lo ie ie ie ie e m ci tro m ci ho lF Sc Sc Sc n he S he S yc Al al gi at As C al al al ic En nd ci Ps tur ic M a and ul og ed ric So ic ol M cs gr Bi phe y si A os Ph tm ,A th Ear FIGURE 2-7: Percentage of Female Doctorates and Postdoctorates in 1997, by Degree Field, for the 1991 to 1996 Degree Cohort. Source: 1997 Survey of Doctorate Recipients. 35

36 ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS 40,000 Male Female 35,000 30,000 25,000 Dollars 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Life Sciences Engineering Physical and Social and Mathematical Behavioral Sciences Sciences FIGURE 2-8: Postdoctoral Salaries in 1997 for Doctorates in the 1991-1996 Cohort, by Gender and Broad Field. Source: 1997 Survey of Doctorate Recipients. in academia and industry are $2,000-3,000 higher than those of all postdocs, while their salaries in government are the same. As with all postdocs, the majority are employed in academia. The latest available data (1997) indicate that members of minority groups are slightly less likely than others to hold postdoctoral positions: 32.3 percent of all PhDs enter postdocs, versus 30.4 percent of minority PhDs. Of those minority group members in regular employment, a greater percentage are employed by universities and four-year colleges than by industry, compared to the rest of the doctoral population. Of all those who received PhDs in 1995 and 1996, 14 per- cent were employed in universities and four-year colleges and 35.6 percent were employed in industry. For minorities, the picture was reversed: 27.1 percent were employed in universities and 21 percent were employed in industry. Additional study is needed to gain a better understanding of this key sub- population and the issues of primary importance to group members. For exam- ple, several focus group participants stated that African-American postdocs may

FEATURES OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION 37 Postdocs and Family Life Many postdocs have reached an age when they want to start families. Two surveys, at the University of California at San Francisco and Baylor College of Medicine, indicated that one-third to one-half of postdocs are parents.12 The Survey of Doctoral Recipients (see Figure 2-9) indicates that more than half of postdocs in all fields except mathematical and computer sciences (45 percent) are married. Many postdocs report a prejudice among both men and women faculty against women who choose to start a family during postdoctoral training and against men who wish to take parental leave after the birth of a child. Nonetheless, institutions are beginning to create appropriate policies that take family life into consideration. At the University of Pennsylvania’s medical school, where the average age of post- docs is 34.5 years, postdocs receive six weeks of paid parental leave. At Vander- bilt, women postdocs who have taken time away from a program to have children are allowed to exceed the institution’s standard five-year training limit. The Howard Hughes Medical Institute builds flexibility into the use of its funding: If a postdoc has a spouse with medical benefits, for example, the postdoc may use the allow- ance normally allotted to medical insurance for child care. Useful “survival techniques” reported by postdoc parents include meticulous time management, careful organization of activities (even including “appointments” to spend time with spouses and children), and highly focused attention to each activity. They advise enlisting extra help from family and friends and a clear under- standing of parental leave policies. The Survival Skills workshop at the University of Pittsburgh notes that the stresses caused by overlapping demands are often associated with depression, and that campus health services usually offer help. Science’s NextWave web site13 offers many specific suggestions by postdocs who are parents. 12See www.bcmitmc.edu/pda/reference/surveyresults.html; www.saa49.ucsf.edu/psa/ 415survey.html 13See nextwave.sciencemag.org Best Practices find few role models among advisers and may experience even more social isolation than some foreign minorities, who are present in higher numbers.14 14Very few postdocs who are members of underrepresented US minority groups participated in the COSEPUP focus groups, including those held at Howard University and Morehouse University School of Medicine (two of the Historically Black Colleges and Universities, or HBCUs); COSEPUP did conduct additional surveys of minority postdoctoral scholars using e-mail lists, but the response rate was far too low to be generally useful.

38 Percent Percent Percent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ag Ag Ag ric ric ric ul ul Bi tu Bi tu ul tu o re ol re Bi r lo og ol og e gi ca ic ic al al lS Sc ci ie Sc en nc ie ce M es M nc M s ed es ed ic ed ic al ic al Sc al Sci ie Sc en nc ie ce es nc s es En En En gi gi gi ne ne ne an er er d in in er C g C Ma om t g C Ma in g om M pu hem om th pu at te a pu em te he r S tic te at rS m E ci atic E ci al em an E r S ica ci l a an art en a an ar an ar en n d h, ce l d th, O A ce d s d th, ce d O At ce m s ce tm O A s an os an os ce tm Sc ph an os Sc ph Sc ph ie eric ie eri ie eri nc , nc c, nc c, es es es Ph Ph Ph As ysic As ysic As ic ys tro s tro s tro s no an no an m d m d no an m d y y y C C he he C m m he is is m Parental Status of Postdocs, by Gender, 1997 Marital Status of Posdocs, By Gender, 1997 try try is try Marital and Parental Status of Postdocs, 1997 So Field and Gender, 1997. Source: 1997 Survey of Doctorate Recipients. So ci So Married ci al ci al Sc al Sc ie Sc ie nc ie nc es nc es es Males Ps Ps Males yc yc Ps Females ho ho yc Females lo lo ho gy gy lo gy Married and Have Children ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS FIGURE 2-9: Percentages of Postdoctorates who are Married or have Children, by PhD

FEATURES OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION 39 TABLE 2-2: Available Data on US Underrepresented Minority Postdoctoral Scholars, 1997. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, 1997. Number of Underrepresented Minority Postdoctorates by Field Life Sciences 711 Engineering 79 Math Sciences 60 Physics 22 Chemistry 155 Atmospheric and Geosciences 23 Social/Behavioral Sciences 192 Total 1,242 Median Salaries of Underrepresented Minority Postdoctorates by employment sector Industry Academia Government Life Sciences 39,000 30,000 37,000 Number of Underrepresented Minority Postdoctorates by employment sector Industry Academia Government Other Total All Science and Engineering Fields 75 881 158 128 1,242 Note: Underrepresented minorities are African-Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans.

40 ENHANCING THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCE FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS Fellowships for Underrepresented Minority Postdocs While minority graduate students can choose among a variety of special fellow- ships, minority postdocs have few options. Among them are the following: The Ford Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowships for Minorities are aimed at minority groups “whose underrepresentation in the professorate and in formal pro- grams of postdoctoral study and research in the United States has been long- standing and remains severe as a result of past discrimination.” For the year 2001, 25 fellowships of $35,000 will be given for one year of postdoctoral research in fields of science or engineering (excluding “practice-based” professions, such as medicine, law, and social work). Eligible applicants include “current or potential college or university faculty members and researchers” who are U.S. citizens and belong to one of the following groups: African-Americans, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians, Native Pacific Islanders, Mexican Americans/Chicanos, and Puerto Ricans. The program is administered by the National Research Council of the National Academies on behalf of the Ford Foundation. The UNCF-Merck Postdoctoral Science Research Fellowships is a program jointly administered by the United Negro College Fund and Merck with ten awards with a stipend of $55,000. This program is “...designed to increase the number of African Americans in the pipeline of biomedical science education and research.” The program is open to US citizens who are African Americans. They may work at academic or nonacademic research institutions, but not private industrial labs. The National Organization for the Professional Advancement of Black Chem- ists & Chemical Engineers (NOBCChE) Awards, “recognizes outstanding scien- tists, engineers, and science teachers who have made significant contributions in their fields.” While most of their awards are intended for graduate and younger students, the Lloyd Ferguson Young Scientist Award goes to young African Amer- ican scientists with 8-10 years of professional experience. See also a web site for minority researchers called “Just/Garcia/Hill Science Web Site,” at http:// hyper.hunter.cuny.edu/jghweb. Best Practices

FEATURES OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION 41 SUMMARY POINTS The postdoctoral years are a time to match one’s education, training, and interests with the changing world of employment options and to acquire the skills necessary to enter that world. A good postdoctoral experience is educational in the sense that it significantly advances one’s professional capabilities and increases one’s technical abilities. The postdoctoral experience differs widely according to discipline, sector, and source of funding. Most postdocs are paid from the grant of a principal investigator and are frequently called research associates. In such situations, they are often treated as employees. A smaller number of postdocs are paid by external, independent mechanisms (e.g., US fellowships and training grants, foreign gov- ernment grants). In such cases, they may be classified as students or receive no institutional classification and are called fellows. “Research associates,” “fellows,” and postdocs with other titles may all perform the same functions in the same laboratories, and yet their institutional title, tax status, compensation, and benefits may differ in significant and often unintended ways. The greatest uncertainties and inequities occur in universities, where most postdocs work. In national and industrial facilities, postdocs are usually treated like other temporary or contract employees and receive similar classification, compensation, and benefits. About half the total US postdoctoral population consists of foreign citizens, half of whom choose to remain in the US after their appointments. Foreign postdocs face extra challenges in mastering English, adapt- ing to American culture and style of work, achieving equitable com- pensation, and dealing with visa requirements. Support mechanisms at host institutions to provide help for foreign postdocs (e.g., with visas, tax laws, and language instruction) are not uniform across the country. Additional information is needed about postdocs who are members of underrepresented minorities; less is known about these groups than is known about foreign postdocs.

Next: 3 Rights, Opportunities, and Responsibilities of the Postdoc »
Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers: A Guide for Postdoctoral Scholars, Advisers, Institutions, Funding Organizations, and Disciplinary Societies Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $44.95 Buy Ebook | $35.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The concept of postdoctoral training came to science and engineering about a century ago. Since the 1960s, the performance of research in the United States has increasingly relied on these recent PhDs who work on a full-time, but on a temporary basis, to gain additional research experience in preparation for a professional research career.

Such experiences are increasingly seen as central to careers in research, but for many, the postdoctoral experience falls short of expectations. Some postdocs indicate that they have not received the recognition, standing or compensation that is commensurate with their experience and skills. Is this the case? If so, how can the postdoctoral experience be enhanced for the over 40,000 individuals who hold these positions at university, government, and industry laboratories?

This new book offers its assessment of the postdoctoral experience and provides principles, action points, and recommendations for enhancing that experience.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!